Published in News

IBM ordered to pay up in racially biased sacking

by on19 April 2021


Told to write an $11.1 million cheque


A federal jury found that former IBM sales manager Scott Kingston had been unlawfully fired by the company and denied sales commission after challenging the treatment of subordinates as racially biased.

The jury told IBM to pay Kingston $11.1 million. The case dates to 2017, when two IBM salespeople within months of each other closed similarly large software sales deals that led to vastly different commission payments. Nick Donato, who was White, received more than a million dollars for a SAS Institute deal, while Jerome Beard, who is Black, was paid about $230,000 for closing a sale to HCL Technologies.

Beard was paid about 15 percent of what he should have received under his agreement with IBM, despite a company policy not to cap sales commissions.

Kingston managed the two salespeople through two lower-level managers, raised his concerns about racial discrimination with his superiors toward the end of 2017.

He said of his conversation with his managers: "They were telling me it wasn't about money; it was some other reason. I flat out said, 'You are leaving no possibility for anybody to conclude another reason than racial discrimination. You are foreclosing any other possible conclusion. You are going to get us sued.'"

Beard sued IBM in 2018. After a failed motion by IBM to dismiss the case in April 2020, the company settled for an undisclosed sum several months later.

IBM fired Kingston in April, 2018 blaming him for allowing Donato's seven-figure commission. The company also fired two other IBM managers, Andre Temidis and Michael Lee, who raised similar objections to the allegedly discriminatory capping of commission due to an Arab-American salesperson.

The Seattle jury found IBM violated Washington State law against discrimination and policies against race discrimination and withholding wages.

IBM said it was disappointed by the jury's verdict and was considering all of its options on appeal.

 

Last modified on 19 April 2021
Rate this item
(0 votes)

Read more about: